It has almost been a year since I started these two threads - Ever Tried Linux: Part I and Ever Tried Linux: Part II -
and by God, I have learned a whole lot more - a lot lot lot more.

Consider this a blog and brace yourself for a very very long read. If you are not the computer type, then you probably haven't heard of most of the terms used here. So start with the first two paragraphs and if you don't like it, ditch it.

So what's new?
I have tested Fedora 9, Fedora 10, OpenSuse 11, Debian 4 Etch, Linux Mint, and Ubuntu 8.10 (Intrepid Ibex) over the past year. And the experience has been ... of mixed feelings.

I was again early in upgrading to Ubuntu 8.10. This time I downloaded the CD and upgraded from it (by default, no automatic upgrades from a Long Term Support release (ubuntu 8.04) to a non LTS release was configured) and besides, I didn't want to leave my laptop upgrading in the office all night, alone, forlorn and forsaken .... I digress. I upgraded the distro fine but I messed up my system, because I didn't upgrade the software running on my system with it. So I had to perform the unforgivable act of leaving my laptop at the office to upgrade at night. (more on this later)

I had a wonderful (almost dreamy) experience with Fedora 8 about 1.5 years ago . I was naturally very eager to try out Fedora 9. So I set up a virtual machine (a software that emulates a PC) and installed Fedora 9 on it. The looks were good, as always, but I just couldn't get the package manager working. They had replaced their usual package manager front-end with another one known as PackageKit and there was no way (not that I can find) to configure a network proxy for it, and I couldn't install rpm packages manually. That meant that I couldn't even install yumex, my favourite package management front-end. As I was browsing the net for answers, I ran across posts accusing Fedora of being on 'the bleeding-edge of technology' - a term I liked very much - so cutting-edge that it fell right over . I immediately stopped and faithfully waited for the next release.

I made the Fedora download page my homepage starting from t-27 days from the release of Fedora 10. Every morning, I see the countdown, beam with a smile, turn over to my colleagues, and state with a sense of purpose "{x} days more". At this time, I was pissed with my messed up Ubuntu system ( the overnight upgrade didn't solve my problems) and I wanted to replace it with Fedora. The day finally came (November 25, if I remember correctly) and as usual, I downloaded the DVD overnight. I installed from the ISO onto a virtual machine (yes you can do that. I love virtual machines, more about that on another blog). Everything looked OK, so I burned a DVD and set myself up for a very wonderful night (I am sounding like a geek purposefully:)). So, I started the installation, I shuffled my partitions (I have become an expert on this), and set up Fedora (almost). The partitioning failed. I screwed up my Ubuntu partition, and I spent the night and the next day trying to fix my mistake. That was a very educating experience. I can say with confidence that only a few people have dared to mess up with partition tables, MBRs, and boot blocks like I did that time. I finally concluded that the partitioner on Fedora was flawed (I haven't verified this), doctored my partitions with other tools (from windows and live CDs - I also love live CDs: I am digressing like crazy today),backed up my files, and installed Fedora 10 - no Ubuntu this time. Fedora 10 was great - it came with OpenOffice.org 3, eclipse and a host of other cool software. It still looked great. But PackageKit was again troublesome. So, I took a good look at Fedora without my rosy spectacles, re-evaluated my options, backed up all the themes and graphics, and reinstalled Ubuntu. Quite not the finale you were expecting, huh?

I now have a very stable Ubuntu 8.10 system on my laptop. No troubles, except finding a modem driver, and dual head works great! After my recent close brush with the 'dulla' virus, I have completely removed Windows from my office machine and installed Ubuntu 8.10. By using Wine and virtual machines for esoteric needs, I have managed to be perfectly content with using GNU/Linux for my daily tasks! I am eagerly waiting to mess up my system again with the 9.04 release of Ubuntu (Jaunty Jackalope). It was scheduled to be released in t-14 days (April 23, to be exact) - better make the site my homepage.

Debian GNU/Linux, the father of Ubuntu, is on the opposite end of the spectrum from Fedora. It is very stable (i.e. the stable version). All software has to pass through a strict testing procedure before being included in the distribution. As a result, the latest stable version of Debian doesn't always include the latest software out there. For the 'initiated', there are testing releases of Debian which are not very stable. One more thing that I like most about Debian is that it comes with almost all of the free software out there! This is very good if you have a really slow connection like I do and can't download packages at whim. So, it took me two nights to download the 4 DVD set of Debian 4 Etch. I must stop here and tell you about the connection at my work place. We have 6MBps of connection shared with >4000 computers! So on the average day (especially lately), my connection speed is about 1kBps (I am not kidding). At night, when everybody leaves their PCs and the bots go to bed because the PC's are switched off, the connection improves dramatically. That is why all my downloads are nocturnal (the superintendent of the building my office is in, unfortunately, kicks me out at around 8:00 PM). Ok, back to Debian 4 Etch (Stable). I simply liked it. I installed it on a virtual machine and the reason for me using it was work. I was able to accomplish the work I was to do on it perfectly OK. Everything was easy for me since I was already familiar with Ubuntu. I would recommend it for either server or back-end applications but not so much for everyday work. You can consider Ubuntu to be the desktop edition of Debian.

I have mixed feelings about OpenSUSE 11. First of all, I really, really, really hate the default green theme. I don't know why but it just puts me off. On the bright side, OpenSUSE is very easy to use (it is even better than Ubuntu at some tasks). It has a concept similar to the Control Panel in windows, where all configurations can be done from within a single application, known as yast. Yast is a great tool, it even provides a means to configure your bootloader - something that is visibly missing from the other distros (by default, I mean). Applications can be launched from something that resembles the Windows Start menu - good for Windows users. (btw, have you noticed that you have to click on 'Start' to 'Shut Down' your PC?). Other than that it is not much different from the other distros. I haven't used it that much but I have had the pleasure of setting it up and configuring it for others to use.

Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. I recently installed it on a virtual machine but didn't get the time to explore it well. It has some additional tools that improve usability (some of them I liked very much) but other than that it looks and feels pretty much the same. I will update you on that once I explore it further.

What are my recent views on GNU/Linux and Windows?
I have an obsession with customization. I want my system to behave and look like I want it and not like how it wants to. I don't like Windows much for that. GNU/Linux is marvelous for obsessive customizers. I have customized my Ubuntu system to look exactly like Fedora (I like the bluish Fedora look and the Nodoka theme). I have customized the bootloader with my own graphic and I will soon customize the splash screen (that is the screen that shows up with the progress bar when Ubuntu is loading), when I get the time and enough reference . The possibilities are endless.

I also like the concept of 'local configurations' for GNU/Linux. Every application has its own configuration files -text files -that you can edit easily. Of course you may need to understand what you are editing first but I really enjoy doing that. No binary configuration files, no global registry to hack, and no mysterious auto-starting process and malware (so far for me, atleast). What keeps on surprising me about GNU/Linux is the fact there is still a huge load of stuff I don't know but yet I can still do some amazing things with it. If I want to know how a certain thing works, I can even go down to the source code level (although I don't have that much energy most of the time). Everything is open and knowing (even partially) how my system works gives me a sense of confidence and security (security is an elusive concept - more on that on another blog). It also inspires me - I may one day develop my own software that people will use and actually like.

A lot of Windows users I have talked to say that it is hard to replace some of the applications they use everyday. That is true. But with every major upgrade of some free software, my list of irreplaceable applications is dwindling. I am having a hard time getting used to Gimp, true, but technically speaking, I don't 'have' Photoshop either (I can't afford it, if I were to obtain it legally). I still have to use Windows for Windows programming, true, but that is expected. There are times that I get frustrated with GNU/Linux and reboot into Windows, but these times are getting less and less frequent as I understand GNU/Linux more and more.

With all that said, I still have some reservations, especially with the mass adoption of GNU/Linux in particular and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) in general. Anyone who had tried to see the history behind GNU/Linux and FOSS will feel that it was meant for hackers and designed by hackers (people who enjoy working with computers for the sake of working with them, not crackers - people who break into systems for whatever reasons). For example, GNU software follow the Unix philosophy of a simple application doing one thing right. So to accomplish a certain task, you may have to pass through a lot of applications. This philosophy is wonderful from an engineering perspective, it is very practical and hackers are very practical people. This however, may deter or even frustrate a person with interests other than computers. Then also, there is so much hype surrounding FOSS and a lot of advocacy - this scares me. When people make the decision to switch to FOSS, they should do so with the understanding of everything involved. They should just not just jump in because 'everybody else' is doing so (the FOSS bandwago n). I wouldn't recommend a graphics designer or a visual effects artist to use GNU/Linux, not yet atleast (if she can afford the alternative). I wouldn't recommend an architect or a GIS specialist to use FOSS. But I would certainly recommend that my company switch its web, ftp, dns, dhcp, and proxy servers to GNU/Linux (not that I have such a company ). I mentioned the same thing (although not articulately) on a GNU/Linux conference here at the ECA and some people thought I was a FOSS hater. With our trickling internet and shortage of FOSS professionals (relatively), adopting a FOSS only policy may not be a wise choice at this time.

A brief lesson in history
GNU stands for Gnu Not Unix (recursive acronym - only programmers will not find it stupid). A hacker (again, a hacker is not a bad man) called Richard Stallman over at MIT did not like the fact that he couldn't legally modify the Unix software he was using at the time (he must have been an obsessive customizer). So he started a movement where he called on to his hacker friends to replace all the Unix tools with free tools (source code available). They called this the "Free Software Movement" and they were building up software to replace Unix with GNU. Hence all the software became known as GNU software and they were licensed with the GNU General Public License (GPL). This is a license that allows you to use the software freely, even modify it. The only catch is, if you use or modify a GNU software to create your own, then you have to distribute your software with the GPL. Meanwhile, another hacker called Linus Torvalds developed a kernel (a kernel is the major part of an Operating System) and called it Linux. He later released it under the GPL. Then all GNU software was ported to work with the Linux kernel (not that difficult because Linux resembles Unix in many ways). Linus and other hackers - Larry Augustin, Eric Raymond and more did not like the term 'Free Software' as businesses understood 'Free' to mean 'with no cost'. Richard Stallman always said 'Free as in free speech not free beer'. So these hackers coined a new term 'Open Source Software'. You should note that Open Source may not mean free from cost.

Phew, this blog has gone way longer than I expected. I will probably post it on a more hackerish site, but I hope you managed to read this far. If you did, please drop in a line.